LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

In the wake of the Alberta election, premier-designate Jason Kenney appeared behind a lectern that had a familiar phrase on the front "Open for business."  It's a refrain that those of us in Ontario are familiar with, given that our own premier, Doug Ford, has made it his slogan since his own election campaign, and part of his attempt to rebrand the province in the time since, removing the "Yours to Discover" from road signs at provincial borders and was rumoured to want to put this on licence plates before he was convinced that it was a bad idea.  Nevertheless, it trades on a certain mythology about how a certain class of politician thinks that business operates, without actually talking to any of those businesses.

If you actually talk to members of the business community (as opposed to some of their lobby groups), a few things become clear that they are generally looking for certainty, and for policy that they can plan around.  This is not what Ford delivered in Ontario when he cancelled a number of green energy contracts and more to the point, legislated immunity for the government from litigation so that these companies who spent the money to fulfil these contracts could not recoup their lost investment.  This is the opposite of certainty, and it created an investment environment that is a high-risk one that is actually hostile to attracting new businesses not that Ford cared.

I have strong suspicions that we're about to see a repeat performance of that same show in Alberta, as Kenney has promised to scrap the province's carbon tax which the majority of the oil and gas industry was in favour of and would rather have the federal carbon price backstop imposed upon them so that they can challenge it in court (and in all likelihood lose), in the hopes that Andrew Scheer's federal Conservatives will win in October and repeal that federal price something that will only create uncertainty for an industry already doing poorly.  Add to that, Kenney has promised to go to war with CEOs who disagree with him, particularly on carbon taxes, which again, makes no sense if his goal is to attract business.  As well, the cancellation of the current green plan in Alberta would likely mean cancelling the investments that its proceeds were funding, and you can imagine that Kenney would also try to insulate his government from the ensuing litigation as Ford has again, creating a disincentive to invest.

And yet, the rhetoric has been focused around lowering corporate taxes, which Rachel Notley's NDP government raised by two percentage points as the province was heading into a recession caused by a collapse in world oil prices.  This is something that many business lobby groups will always demand, but some of the more credible ones are asking instead for tax simplification.  And sure, there is an economic case to be made that cutting corporate taxes could create jobs, but I hear more often that policy predictability is the bigger concern, and I don't see that coming from Kenney.

One particular case in point was how weirdly specific policy ideas started appearing in the party's platform documents mid-campaign items that had not been there in the initial release of the document.  Any changes were supposed to be limited to typos or grammatical clarification, but out of the blue, reclassifying service rigs, doing away with rural road permits, and extending equipment certification periods were all added after the fact, and it was done with a shrug of "we said there was more to come," without any particular discussion.  Kenney's positions like Ford's have changed depending on who has his ear at the particular moment, and this sudden new policy adoption is indicative of that, which seems unlikely to engender a level of trust that there will be the kind of predictability that investors look for.

The other aspect of "open for business" that Kenney is pushing that we should be aware of is that it's a certain kind of business that he's open to, but there are a number of other economic ventures in the province that have been looking for support to grow and expand, but they can't seem to get the attention of a government NDP or conservative that is obsessed with trying to recapture the glory years of the oil booms.  To a certain extent, it's a behaviour that echoes the "chasing the dragon" phenomenon of opioid addicts who keep trying to replicate their first high, but they never can.  And given the changing global energy market that came along with the shale revolution, it seems unlikely that Alberta will ever see another boom like it was used to.  And as much as the bumper stickers would read "Please God, give us another oil boom and we promise not to piss it away this time," they always did, and that is unlikely to change, particularly given that Kenney's apparent single-minded focus is about trying to recapture that status-quo rather than moving toward a future with a more diverse economy.

There are other structural problems that Kenney doesn't seem to want to face either, such as the cohort of under-educated men who have come to expect high incomes in the oil patch, which is going to become more acute as the economic high of the boom doesn't return.  Kenney scoffed over social media when this was flagged, trying to dismiss it as coming from elitists rather than real people, but as the economy changes, this cohort will be less able to adapt.  In fact, when one economist pointed out that the province's economic recovery had worked out well for women, who were seeing more employment in the years since the last oil crash, there was crickets in response.  This is something that should concern everyone an angry population of undereducated men who are used to wielding outsized economic influence is something that will breed hard-right populism if history is any guide.  Kenney's decision to stoke that anger for his own ends will be a problem he has to deal with sooner than later, and ignoring the structural problems will only make it worse.  But right now, the focus remains on chasing the dragon, and it will have consequences.

Photo Credit: CBC News

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


To paraphrase Game of Thrones, climate change is here.

We're now no longer able to prevent climate change from happening, but we can hope to limit its disastrous effects — if we act quickly and aggressively.

Conservative politicians would prefer to focus on the dollars and cents that putting a price on carbon pollution carries to consumers.  This is quite literally missing the forest for the trees — or more accurately, missing the forest fires for the trees.  The cost of pollution pricing is minuscule to the point of nonsignificant compared to the costs of climate change itself.

Carbon pricing, whether through a Conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney-style cap-and-trade system or a conservative Premier Gordon Campbell-style carbon tax, is the bare minimum we need to do to blunt the effects of climate change.  By making the cost of polluting the planet greater, market-minded economists argue, we can shift behaviour to less carbon-intensive consumer patterns.  It's self-evident.

Of course, like former president Barack Obama implementing a Republican proposal for market-based health-care reforms, once a liberal is for it, Conservatives cannot help but spot an opportunity to engage in a little intellectual dishonesty.  So, Conservative politicians across the country are laser-focused on opposing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's pollution-pricing scheme — and they have no plan of their own, just mindless and self-defeating opposition.

Yet, climate change is too important to risk on cyclical partisan manoeuvring.  It's a national security concern and an existential threat.  Anyone who says otherwise is either lying or ignorant — or both.

As David Wallace-Wells argues in his new book, The Uninhabitable Earth: Life After Warming, we will face "a planet battered daily by hurricanes and monsoons we used to call 'natural disasters' but will soon normalize as 'bad weather'… the foreign minister of the Marshall Islands offers another name…'genocide'".

Wallace-Wells cites scientific studies that label the coming decades "the century of hell", with global damages approaching $600 trillion dollars — "more than twice the wealth that exists in the world today".  That certainly puts the extra cents at the pumps Conservative politicians have been visiting so religiously lately into shocking perspective.  Put another way, he suggests "every degree of warming, it's been estimated, costs a temperate country like the United States about one percentage point of GDP… you have almost entirely wiped out the very possibility of economic growth".

The economic impacts are nothing compared to the human suffering that will unfold: "150 million more people would die from air pollution alone in a 2-degree warmer world… more than twice the greatest death toll of any kind, World War II".

He argues, "climate change appears to be not merely one challenge among many facing a planet already struggling… but the all-encompassing stage on which all those challenges will be met".

And therein may lie the solution.

Recent polling commissioned by the progressive social media community North 99 by Abacus Research points to the solution: 61% of Canadians surveyed favour a "Green New Deal" effort to combat climate change as aggressively as possible.  The aspirational plan calls not for the technocratic, baby-step efforts we've seen from politicians, but rather a massive mobilization of national resources not seen since the first New Deal harnessed the purchasing and employment powers of the entire United States government to put thousands of people to work on century-defining public works projects — a programme of civic imagination Franklin Delano Roosevelt would convert into the "great arsenal of democracy" that propelled America out of the depths of the Depression into super-power status, victor in a World War and defeater of "fear itself".

As Taylor Scollon of North 99 puts plainly: "The conversation among politicians has revolved around pollution pricing, but climate change is an existential challenge and requires a solution that matches its scale.  Canadians know we need a much broader mobilization against climate change".

Conservatives may choose to bury their heads in the sands of climate change denial and obstructionism, but progressives need not join them.  The time has come for a Canadian version of a Green New Deal, one that puts thousands of blue-collar folks to work building renewable energy, public transit and electric-car infrastructure, retrofitting government buildings to be energy efficient, and far, far more.

Averting the worst of the climate disasters we've been warned about my entire lifetime is possible; so, too, is the chance to put people to work.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.